Mr. Speaker, I would request the unanimous consent of the House to table a resolution from the town of Markham which I referred to in my statement earlier today and I ask that it be distributed to all members.

Markham ResolutionRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to table the document she referred to during her statement under Standing Order 31?

Markham ResolutionRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

February 13th, 1998 / 12:20 p.m.

NDP

Bev Desjarlais NDP Churchill, MB

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition from residents of New Brunswick. “We the undersigned residents of Canada draw the attention of the House to the following: that the Canadian Human Rights Act includes provisions to end pay discrimination against women by making equal pay for work of equal value the law”.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I hesitate to interrupt the hon. member. The rules provide that she may give a brief summary of the petition, but she is not to read the petition and I would urge her to comply with the rules in that regard.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

NDP

Bev Desjarlais NDP Churchill, MB

Mr. Speaker, a Canadian human rights commission tribunal has ruled that the results of the study are reliable and that petitioners call on Parliament to put an end to this pay discrimination by implementing the results of the joint study through negotiations with the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the union representing those workers.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Reform

Darrel Stinson Reform Okanagan—Shuswap, BC

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a petition from 27 people in my riding of Okanagan—Shuswap. These people point out that the best way to deal with nuclear weapons is to do away with them entirely.

Therefore they ask Parliament to support an immediate start of an international convention which will create a binding timetable for the abolition of all nuclear weapons.

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Peterborough Ontario

Liberal

Peter Adams LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, Question No. 18 will be answered today. .[Text]

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Reform

Garry Breitkreuz Reform Yorkton—Melville, SK

How much has the government spent implementing all the provisions passed in Bill C-68, an act respecting firearms and other weapons, which received royal assent (Chapter No. 53) on November 8, 1995; and ( a ) provide an accounting of how this money has been spent; ( b ) provide information on how many federal employees are working on the implementation of this statute and what part of it they are working on; and ( c ) provide a revised estimate of the total cost and number of federal employees needed to implement the provisions of this statute in each province and territory?

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Edmonton West Alberta

Liberal

Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

The Firearms Act received royal assent December 5, 1995. To date, the government has expended $34.3 million on the implementation of this legislation. Monies expended to date have been utilized for the design and development of the new Canadian firearms registration system, CFRS, for the development of communications vehicles to make the requirements of the new legislation understood by firearms owners and for associated program administration and liaison costs with federal-provincial-territorial partners.

At the present time, 53 federal Department of Justice employees are working on the implementation of this statute at the Canadian firearms centre, CFC. The overall salary cost to date for 1997-98 is $1.9 million.

No federal employees would be involved in the administration of the Firearms Act within the provinces and territories under normal circumstances. However, in view of the position taken by the governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and the Northwest Territories, we are developing plans with the RCMP for the provision of administrative services within those jurisdictions. These plans are not yet complete and, accordingly, the specific resources required to perform the required work and costs related thereto are not known at this time.

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Adams Liberal Peterborough, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

The Speaker

Is that agreed?

Questions On The Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

12:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

SupplyGovernment Orders

12:20 p.m.

Bloc

Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in this debate on the poverty issue, which is brought into focus by the motion put forward by the New Democratic Party, especially since this year is the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. This declaration sets out the basic social and economic rights that should be guaranteed to ensure that the most basic needs of every human being are met.

Must I remind the federal government that, under the agreements signed in Copenhagen in 1995, it is required to find concrete ways in which to improve the living conditions of the poorest of the poor in Canada. We must recognize that, as noble as the words may be, reality is distressing and this government is more concerned with its visibility than with the need to put up a real fight against poverty.

To better understand this reality, let me briefly describe the situation with respect to poverty and then outline government actions that make the situation worse. The Bloc Quebecois has suggestions to make and I will suggest a few solutions.

It will become obvious, in comparing the actions taken by this government and the solutions put forward by the Bloc Quebecois, that two diametrically opposed visions are taking shape in Canada regarding the distribution of wealth. Two different readings which clearly illustrate that there is one country but two peoples, as well as the necessity for Quebec to attain sovereignty.

In my riding of Québec, poverty has a face and a name. It is a reality we face every day. In some districts, the unemployment level exceeds 15%.

On top of this high unemployment rate, there is an increase in the number of welfare recipients. This sad reality impacts on our socio-community organizations and our soup kitchens, whose mission it is to alleviate poverty, but who have great difficulty keeping abreast of the demand.

The first victims of this tragedy are children, young people and women. We must not forget the too many families living below the poverty line, either. Need I remind you that 20% of the population of Canada lives below the poverty line.

It is all very well to support “zero tolerance” of poverty, but what strikes me as essential are the concrete actions that must be taken to improve the situation of the most disadvantaged.

When we speak of concrete actions, we mean such things as remedying the inequality of taxation practices, not taxing low wage earners to death and encouraging job creation. Canada's track record as far as poverty is concerned is not as great as this government would have us believe. Canada ranks 2nd out of 14 industrialized countries where poverty is concerned. Canada has the lowest basic child allowance.

The problem is equally dramatic where young people are concerned. Of the 400,000 Quebeckers without jobs in 1995, 35% were young people between the ages of 15 and 29. And for all kinds of family, the 25 and under category is far and away the poorest.

I would like to remind the House what the present government has done to put its fiscal house in order. In their single-minded battle to bring down the deficit, the Liberals have turned a blind eye to poverty since they took office in 1993. I would even go so far as to say that the measures they have introduced have played a large role in widening the gap between the rich and the poor.

In order to put their fiscal house in order, here is what the Liberals have done. First, they have cut provincial transfer payments in such key areas as health, education and income security. During its two terms in office, the Liberal government has cut social transfers by $42 billion. Cuts to transfer payments to the provinces represent 54% of all cuts by the present government between 1994 and 1998. And although the government forecast spending cuts of 19%, actual cuts were only 9%.

In addition, they savagely attacked the unemployed. Over the last year, the Liberal government has recovered $1.5 billion on the backs of the unemployed by tightening the EI rules.

They raised taxes and increased tax revenue by refusing to index tax tables, GST credits, and the child tax benefit. Measures such as these saved this government $2 billion.

That is what the Liberal government has done. Briefly, its savings come from $46 billion in cuts on the backs of the most disadvantaged members of society. That is how they have reduced their deficit. Bluntly put, they have reduced their deficit on the backs of the provinces, the unemployed and the poor, not to mention the middle class, which is steadily losing ground.

The Bloc Quebecois has some suggestions. As the Liberal government gets ready to bring down the budget, the Bloc Quebecois is proposing a number of measures that would protect the public from new rounds of slashed social programs, improve the situation of the most disadvantaged and ensure a better distribution of resources.

We are therefore calling on the government to avoid the temptation to do something visible at all costs by instituting new social measures that would duplicate and overlap what is already being done provincially and that would ultimately penalize those whose need is greatest.

We are asking the government to give the provinces tax points as reimbursement for the amounts kept back during the Liberal's first term from the health, education and social welfare transfers. The provinces are in a better position than the federal government to provide sustainable and reasonable solutions to people's problems.

We are asking the government to change the employment insurance plan. The Bloc wants the employment insurance fund to be kept separate from the government consolidated fund. It also wants half of the annual surplus in the account to be used to reduce contributions and the other to go to improving the current system and supporting the efforts of small and medium size business to preserve and create jobs.

We can never say it enough. The unemployment insurance fund must be returned to workers and not used to reduce the deficit.

We are asking the government to make targeted income tax reductions. Tax tables, GST credits and child tax credits must be re-indexed to inflation.

We must remember that, because the credit is not indexed, 50,000 children are no longer entitled to the maximum benefit each year and its value has decreased for those families continuing to receive it.

What is more, 840,000 low income families have begun to pay tax because tax levels and personal exemptions are not indexed.

The Bloc Quebecois supports the New Democratic Party's motion, but it reminds members of this House that Quebec will have a tax policy that will enable it to really fight poverty, once it has the tools. The day may not be so far off.

SupplyGovernment Orders

12:30 p.m.

Reform

Roy H. Bailey Reform Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the debate which was introduced by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. We have heard from all parties in this House at the present time.

Before they go on with further talk, we should look at what measures have been taken by places in Canada, in the United States and around the world to deal with this particular problem. In North America we will find that the people who have the lowest unemployment and the people who are giving and entertaining the most employment are governments that have taken a look at their tax structure. They have the best employment.

I want to refer the member for Qu'Appelle to my province of Saskatchewan—

SupplyGovernment Orders

12:30 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

With respect, questions and comments should be directed to the hon. member for Quebec.

SupplyGovernment Orders

12:30 p.m.

Reform

Roy H. Bailey Reform Souris—Moose Mountain, SK

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, they look alike. We have a government that has sold many of its crown corporations. It has lowered the taxes to multinational corporations. It has lowered the taxes in potash. It has lowered the taxes in oil and thus Saskatchewan is almost parallel to Alberta in having the highest employment. This comes by governments lowering taxes, thus feeding the industry and thus creating jobs. You do not create jobs by continuing high taxation. That is the point we have to get across.